202 JOURNAL OF NEAR EASTERN STUDIES VOL. 62 No.

other Semitic languages. Huehnergard assesses other notions documenting the evolution of so-
the state of Semitic studies as a whole, recom- cieties-the Near East as scientific case study-
mending a more historical approach to language have recently come under attack. Liverani gives
classification and greater use of linguistic theory one answer: studying the ancient Near East
and new technology, while Kaufman warns gives us analytical tools and critical distance
against overspecialization and suggests ways in that allow us to understand our own political
which computers can be used in philology. systems. In my view, the field would also do
A disparate group of three papers focuses on weil to encourage a more fully collegial rela-
ideology, broadly construed. Liverani's paper, tionship with scholars, the public, and states of
entitled "2084," traces stages in studying ancient the modem Middle East.
political ideologies-which he defines as sys-
tems of propaganda-in the Near East. The first GEOFF EMBERLING
was simple acknowledgement of biases in an-
University of Michigan
cient royal texts. The next, due primarily to Liv-
erani's own work, has been to see ideology not
as a bias that obscures objective history, but as a
subject that poses deeper historical questions. A Survey of Neo-Elamite History. By MATTHEW
Finally, Liverani suggests the time has come for W. WATERS. State Archives of Assyria Stud-
scholars to apply these methods to themselves; ies 12. Helsinki: Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus
in fact, he suggests that tools of this trade will Project, 2000. Pp. xviii + 139. $29.50.
allow Near Eastern scholars of the future to As can be deduced from the title, this book
decode the propaganda of their own states. deals with Neo-Elamite history (ca. 1000-ca.
Halpern advocates a plurality of perspectives 550 B.e.). The study of this particular period in
on the past and discusses kinship systems and Elamite history is, due to the nature of the
aspects of states in the early first-millennium (mostly Mesopotamian) sources, limited to the
southern Levant. His interdisciplinary approach study of the relations between the Elamite king-
incorporates historical sources, archaeological dom and the Neo-Assyrian empire. The intro-
excavation, and the objects of art history. Baines duction con tains sections entitled "Periodization
focuses on the ideology of identity in the Egyp- and Chronology" (pp. 3-4), "Overview of the
tian state, showing, through a number of ex- Sources" (pp. 4-8), "Notes on Methodology and
amples, that ethnic diversity existed in practice Transliteration" (pp. 8-9, and "The Early Neo-
in Egypt even when denied in royal propaganda Elamite Period" (pp. 10-11). In the following
and overlooked by modern scholarship. chapters (2-6), the author deals in chronologi-
The volume concludes with an appreciation cal order with the history of the several Neo-
of the life of Albright by Machinist and a com- Elamite kings, who reigned from 743 until 645
mentary by Robert McC. Adams that empha- B.C. The se ven th chapter is a collection entitled
sizes the importance of fieldwork and advocates "Late and Uncertain Rulers and Inscriptions."
expanding the intellectual boundaries of the field. The last chapter con tains the conclusions the
As useful as many of the individual studies are, author draws from the foregoing chapters. Fi-
the book falls weil short of Albright's breadth nally, in three appendixes a "chronology of Neo-
of vision for the field. The editors note that the Elamite Rulers" (pp. 109-10) and a more detailed
criticisms of orientalism are not addressed in treatment of two historical problems, "Sutruk-
the book, and this is symptomatic of a larger Nahhunte and Sutur-Nahhunte" (pp. 111-16)
absence: discussion of the position of the field and "Dating Ashurbanipal's Campaigns against
of ancient Near Eastern Studies in the future. In Huban-Haltas III" (pp. 117-18) are offered. Ali
what ways will the field be relevant to the this is followed by a bibliography (pp. 119-32)
broader world of the twenty-first century? This and well-prepared indexes (pp. 113-39).
is a question that disciplines must continually Sorne remarks and/or additions follow:
address. The old justification of connections to P. 16: the title miir abatisu, "sister-son,
biblical scholarship holds no great promise, and nephew," is a translation from the Elamite
JULY 2003 BOOK REVIEWS 203

original ruhu sak.! According to Yu. B. Yusi- between Sutruk-Nahhunte and Huban-nikas.
fov,2 this term is a compound, consisting of Konig, however, ne ver mentions any mis-
ruhu, "maternaI son, legitimate child born take made by the author of the Babylonian
from a legitimate wife,,,3 and sak, "paternal Chronicle.!! His proposaI incorporates ail the
son.,,4 The word can have several meanings: sources without defining one of them as being
(1) "nephew," (2) "grandson" (the attestations wrong: Huban-immena and Huban-tahra were
from the late Neo-Elamite and the Achaemenid brothers, Huban-immena being the eldest. Both
period ail have this meaning),5 and (3) "Iegit- brothers must have had the same wife, who
imate heir," i.e., a royal descendant who is bore Huban-nikas and Hallusu/Hallutas-Insu-
legitimate maternally as weil as paternally.6 sinak to Huban-tahra and Sutruk-Nahhunte to
The last meaning was most likely also used as Huban-immena. Thus the genealogical table is
a title. 7 as shown on the next page.
P. 17: by 1916 Hüsing identified Karindas with
Kerend on the caravan route from Baghdad to Konig assumes that both Huban-immena and
Hamadan. The place was probably named Huban-tahra were once kings of Elam. When
after the Kassite king Karindas (end of the fif- Huban-immena died, Huban-tahra succeeded him
teenth century B.C.)8 and is also attested in and appointed Sutruk-Nahhunte II as his suc-
Avestan, under the name Kvirinta (Altir. Wb., cessor. Elsewhere, Konig thinks it was Huban-
p.476).9 nikas 1 who appointed Sutruk-Nahhunte II as his
P. 21: there might also be an indirect Elamite successor.
source for this conftict between Nibê and Waters's solution does not differ very much
Aspa-bara, if EKI 72 IV ("and 1 have taken from Konig's theory. Huban-tahra and Huban-
the god Insusinak in Karindas") can be con- immena indeed had the same wife. This wife,
nected with these events. In that case, Sutruk- however, was, according to Waters, the daugh-
Nahhunte II came along Karindas on his way ter of Huban-tahra. If that is the case, we can as-
to Aspa-bara.!O The au th or refers to this indi- sume that Hallusu/Hallutas-Insusinak and Sutruk-
rectly on p. 17. Nahhunte II were both brothers (maternally) and
Pp. 26-27: according ta the author, Konig be- nephews (paternally).
lieved that the Babylonian Chronicle was In my view, both theories are plausible, if one
wrong in its description of the relations takes inta account the incestuous relationships

! Spelled ru-hu.sa-ak, ru-hu.sâ-ak-ri, ru-h-hu.sâ- "Une brique élamite de Hutelutish-Insushnak," DAF!

ak-ri, and ru-hu.sâ-ku-ri; see W. Hinz and H. Koch, 8[19781: 98) is too general.
Elamisches Worterbuch, Archaologische Mitteilungen 7 Vallat, "Susa and Susiana in Second-Millennium
aus Iran, Erganzungsband 17 (Berlin, 1987), pp. 1044- Iran," J. Sasson, ed., Civilisations of the Ancient Near
46 (El. Wb.). East, vol. 2 (New York, 1995), pp. 1028-29.
2 Yu. B. Yusifov, "The Problem of the Order of 8 See J. Brinkman, Catalogue ofCuneiform Sources
Succession in Elam again," Acta Antiqua Academiae Pertaining to Specifie Monarchs of the Kassite Dy-
Scientiarum Hungaricae 22 (1974): 328. nasty. Materials and Studies for Kassite History 1
3 F. W. Konig, "Mutterrecht und Thronfolge im (Chicago, 1976), pp. 169-72.
alten Elam," Festschrift der Nationalbibliothek in 9 G. Hüsing, Die einheimischen Quellen Zur Ge-
Wien, herausgegeben zur Feier des 200-jiihrigen Be- sehiehte E!ams. 1. Teil: Altelamisehe Texte in Um-
stehens des Gebiiudes (Vicnna, 1926), p. 532; Yusi- .l'ch rift mit Bemerkungell, eiller Einleitllng und einem
[ov, "K BOllpOCY 05 3J1aMCKOM IIpeCTOJlOHaClle.l]J111," Anhang, Assyriologischc Bibliothek 24/1 (Leipzig,
Vestnik Drevnei Istorii 129 (1974): 13. 1916),p.53.
4 El. Wb., pp. 1110-11. 10 Künig, Die elamischen Künigsinschriftell, p. 147,
5 El. Wb., p. 1046. n.IO.
6 W. Hinz, "Elamica," Or., n.s., 32 (1963): 6; Il For his discussion of the problem, sec Konig,
Konig, Die elamisehen Kônigsinsehrifien, AfO Bei- "Gcschwisterehe in Elam," Reallexikon der Assyrio-
heft 16 (Graz, 1965), p. 138, n. 5. The mcaning "de- logie, vol. 3 (Berlin and New York, 1957-·71), p. 226
scendant" (F. Grillot, "La postposition génitive -na en and idem, Die elal11ischen KÔl1ig.,"inschriftel1, p. 8,
élamite," Cahiers de la Délégation Archéologique n. 100, and p. 147.
Française en Iran [DAFJ] 3 [19731: 144: F. Vallat,
204 JOURNAL OF NEAR EASTERN STUDIES VOL. 62 No. 3

(unknown father)
1
Huban-immena 00 wife 00 Huban-tahra

Sutruk-Nahhunte II Huban-Nikas I Hallusu/Hallutas-Insusinak

in Elamite royal history, a good example of former head of the Oriental Department of the
which is given by Waters. Nevertheless, the de- State Hermitage Museum in St. Petersburg. The
scription of Sutruk-Nahhunte as the mar aJ;a- previous volumes in the series covered various
ti.su of Huban-Nikas I could be an argument in aspects in relations between Mesopotamia and
favor of Konig's view. Huban-nikas I then made Iran from 3500 to 1600, 1600 to 539, and 539-
Sutruk-Nahhunte his mar ahtiti.su, his "Iegiti- 330 B.C.E. This volume covers the time period
mate heir." In this context, it becomes c1ear that from the fall of the Achaemenid Empire in 330
mar aJ;titisu is used as a title rather than an indi- B.C.E. to the demi se of the Sasanian Empire and
cation of a family relationship. Whichever the- the Islamic conque st of Iran in 642 C.E.
ory seems most plausible, we can safely assume The volume begins with a preface by the edi-
that Hallusu can be identified with Hallutas- tor on the most recent seminar and other related
Insusinak and that no mistake occurs in any of activities at the British Museum. An introduc-
the sources. tion, also by the editor, sets the stage for the
This study is a very good tool for any scholar articles by giving a short account of Alexander's
who wants to do research on this period. It gives campaigns in the east and their aftermath, espe-
an excellent overview of the period and touches cially the rise of Se\eucid Empire, and the im-
the several historical and chronological prob- pact of Hellenic culture on eastern cultures as
lems connected with it, though not always in evidenced in the archaeological record.
detail. This is, however, not a particular fault, In the first article, Richard Frye presents a
since it was the author's intention to present an short survey of Parthian and Sasanian history,
introduction, a "survey," to this period of E1am- emphasizing such important points as the im-
ite history, which sometimes tends to be for- pact of the different socioeconomic backgrounds
gotten in Assyriological research. Consequently, of nomadic Parthians and sedentary Sasanians
Survey of Neo-Elamite History deserves to be on the ways they organized and governed their
on the bookshelf of any scholar who studies the respective empires. These are often understud-
first millennium B.C., whether he is an Elamite ied questions in Iranian history, which obvi-
history specialist or not. ously de serve c10ser inspection.
Vesta Sarkhosh Curtis explores Parthian ma-
JAN TAVERNIER terial culture, especially various items of c1oth-
ing, in an attempt to isolate characteristic Parthian
Katholieke Universiteit
Leuven traits. Georgina Herrmann presents a survey of
Sasanian rock reliefs and other portraiture of
Sasanian kings with an insightful attempt to
connect changes in artistic traditions with socio-
Mesopotamia and Iran in the Parthian and Su- political changes in the Sasanian Empire. Pru-
sanian Periods: Rejection and Revival c. 238 dence Harper presents a short history of the
BC-AD 642. Edited by JOHN CURTIS. Lon- acquisition of Sasanian and Sasanian-style met-
don: British Museum Press, 2000. Pp. 104 + alware by major museums, especially the Rus-
68 figs. + 19 pis. 5:20. sian collections at the Hermitage. It should be
The present volume is the fourth and, sadly, mentioned that in the early 1990s, a fair number
the last installment in the proceedings of British of Sasanian metalware objects were confiscated
Museum seminars in memory of the late Vladi- from antiquities dealers in Iran. This collection
mir G. Lukonin, a distinguished scholar of Par- was put on exhibit shortly thereafter. Also, among
thian and Sasanian Iran and Central Asia and the the objects attributed to the so-called Kal-